The professor of the #distractinglysexy fame loses his job

Started by Martinus, June 17, 2015, 02:51:02 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Martinus

Quote from: katmai on June 19, 2015, 01:46:28 AM
Quote from: Martinus on June 19, 2015, 12:22:08 AM
Quote from: merithyn on June 18, 2015, 08:03:57 PM
Anyone even know what this guy won the Nobel for?

Are you now going to question the validity or relevance of his Nobel prize? Wow.  :lol:


Says the guy who said dismiss the Peace Prize winners.

Apples and oranges. :P

The Brain

Quote from: merithyn on June 18, 2015, 08:03:57 PM
Anyone even know what this guy won the Nobel for?

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2001/press.html

QuoteTimothy Hunt (born 1943), Imperial Cancer Research Fund, London, is awarded for his discovery of cyclins, proteins that regulate the CDK function. He showed that cyclins are degraded periodically at each cell division, a mechanism proved to be of general importance for cell cycle control.

Which, together with his women comment, lands him somewhere between Hitler and Nicki Minaj.
Women want me. Men want to be with me.

Richard Hakluyt

"Distinguished for his studies of the control of protein synthesis in animal cells and for the discovery of cyclin, a protein which regulates the eukaryotic cell cycle. Together with Jackson and their students, he defined steps in formation of the initiation complex in protein synthesis, showing that the 40S ribosomal subunit binds initiator tRNA before it binds mRNA, and that this step was the target of inhibitors such as double-stranded RNA or haem deficiency. They showed that inhibition of protein synthesis is mediated by reversible phosphorylation of initiation factor eIF-2 by two distinct protein kinases and they elucidated the unexpected roles of thioredoxin and thioredoxin reductase in protein synthesis. With Ruderman and Rosenthal, he demonstrated selective translational control of mRNA in early clam embryos. This led to Hunt's discovery of cyclin as a protein which is selectively destroyed in mitosis. He subsequently cloned and sequenced cyclin cDNA from sea urchins and frogs and showed by elegant mRNA ablation experiments that cyclin translation is necessary for mitosis in frog embryos. He has also shown that cyclin is a subunit of the mitosis-promoting factor which regulates entry into mitosis. His discovery and characterization of cyclin are major contributions to our knowledge of cell cycle regulation in eukaryotic cells."

:hmm:


Martinus

So, in other words, he advanced humanity towards the goal of finding cure for cancer. But yeah, let's pillory him for saying something stupid.

garbon

Interesting how you trivialize his recent actions.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

Martinus

Quote from: garbon on June 19, 2015, 02:30:39 AM
Interesting how you trivialize his recent actions.

His recent actions were trivial.

garbon

"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

The Minsky Moment

Quote from: Martinus on June 19, 2015, 02:05:56 AM
So, in other words, he advanced humanity towards the goal of finding cure for cancer. But yeah, let's pillory him for saying something stupid.

That's the pro-Shockley argument.  Doesn't work.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

Ideologue

#188
Quote from: Martinus on June 19, 2015, 02:05:56 AM
So, in other words, he advanced humanity towards the goal of finding cure for cancer. But yeah, let's pillory him for saying something stupid.

In other words, he was part of a team of equally or near-equally talented people who likely could've done it without him, and who also failed to be morons in public a decade later.

Your understanding of science is somewhat bizarre, and a little lazy. You do realize that scientific discoveries, however brilliant, are not simply conjured by Chosen Ones, right? And that the human species produces sufficient intellects to understand them that your alleged Necessary Men could be superseded readily enough by others in most cases?

This is coming from me, and I practically think a STEM degree should be a requirement to vote. Just because someone is smarter than you or I in a given field and you've heard his name because of the publicity of a Nobel win doesn't mean he's absolutely unique.
Kinemalogue
Current reviews: The 'Burbs (9/10); Gremlins 2: The New Batch (9/10); John Wick: Chapter 2 (9/10); A Cure For Wellness (4/10)

Legbiter

Turns out his life was ruined by a feminist con artist. Whoops.

QuoteThe report began by confirming that Sir Tim had joked about falling in love with women in laboratories and 'making them cry'. However, it said he'd prefaced those comments with an ironic introduction, joking that they would illustrate what a 'chauvinist monster' he was.

The report then revealed the existence of an entire second half of the controversial toast. In it, Sir Tim was said to have told his audience that his remark about 'making them cry' was, indeed, an ironic joke.He purportedly said, 'now seriously . . .' before going on to speak enthusiastically about the 'important role' women scientists play. He ended by joking that his largely female audience should pursue their trade, 'despite monsters like me'.

The report's author added: 'I didn't notice any uncomfortable silence or any awkwardness in the room as reported on social and then mainstream media,' going on to describe the speech as 'warm and funny'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3141158/A-flawed-accuser-Investigation-academic-hounded-Nobel-Prize-winning-scientist-job-reveals-troubling-questions-testimony.html

Read further, she's a real piece of work.
Posted using 100% recycled electrons.

HVC

On the one hand it's dailymail, on the other it'd be funny if the stupidity she started comes around and wrecks her too. Karma and what not.
Being lazy is bad; unless you still get what you want, then it's called "patience".
Hubris must be punished. Severely.

Admiral Yi


Legbiter

Quote from: HVC on June 29, 2015, 08:18:40 AM
On the one hand it's dailymail, on the other it'd be funny if the stupidity she started comes around and wrecks her too. Karma and what not.

Yeah hard hitting factual reporting from them of all places.  :lol:

Of course this won't make any difference, female feelz were hurt by the fabrication.
Posted using 100% recycled electrons.

Martinus


DGuller

Quote from: Legbiter on June 29, 2015, 07:45:39 AM
Turns out his life was ruined by a feminist con artist. Whoops.

QuoteThe report began by confirming that Sir Tim had joked about falling in love with women in laboratories and 'making them cry'. However, it said he'd prefaced those comments with an ironic introduction, joking that they would illustrate what a 'chauvinist monster' he was.

The report then revealed the existence of an entire second half of the controversial toast. In it, Sir Tim was said to have told his audience that his remark about 'making them cry' was, indeed, an ironic joke.He purportedly said, 'now seriously . . .' before going on to speak enthusiastically about the 'important role' women scientists play. He ended by joking that his largely female audience should pursue their trade, 'despite monsters like me'.

The report's author added: 'I didn't notice any uncomfortable silence or any awkwardness in the room as reported on social and then mainstream media,' going on to describe the speech as 'warm and funny'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3141158/A-flawed-accuser-Investigation-academic-hounded-Nobel-Prize-winning-scientist-job-reveals-troubling-questions-testimony.html

Read further, she's a real piece of work.
I would wait until it's confirmed in reputable sources, but it's not surprising at all if it does get confirmed.  As I said in my first post in this thread, common sense would indicate that given that he spoke to women in that event, there must've been a context from which the quote was ripped.